20210089 Ver 2_ePCN Application_20220721

Pre -Construction Notification (PCN) Form
For Nationwide Permits and Regional General Permits
(along with corresponding Water Quality Certifications)
April 13, 2022 Ver 4.3
Initial Review
Has this project met the requirements for acceptance in to the review process?*
OO Yes
O No
Is this project a public transportation project?*
OYes 0No
Change only if needed.
Pre -Filing Meeting Date Request was submitted on:
5/2/2022
BIMS # Assigned* Version#*
20210089 2
Is a payment required for this project?*
O No payment required
O Fee received
O Fee needed - send electronic notification
Reviewing Office*
Raleigh Regional Office - [phone]
Information for Initial Review
What amout is owed?*
® $240.00
0 $570.00
Select Project Reviewer*
Colleen Cohn:eads\cmcohn
la. Name of project:
Lake Michie Dam and Raw Water Pump Station Improvements
la. Who is the Primary Contact?*
Keven Arrance
lb. Primary Contact Email:*
[e-mail]
Date Submitted
7/21/2022
Nearest Body of Water
Lake Michie and Flat River
Basin
Neuse
Water Classification
WS-III; NSW, CA (lake); WS-IV; NSW, CA (river)
Site Coordinates
Latitude:
36.14950
A. Processing Information
Longitude:
-78.82834
lc. Primary Contact Phone:*
[phone]
County (or Counties) where the project is located:
Durham
Is this a NCDMS Project
0Yes ONo
Is this project a public transportation project?*
0Yes ONo

la. Type(s) of approval sought from the Corps:
EI Section 404 Permit (wetlands, streams and waters, Clean Water Act)
❑ Section 10 Permit (navigable waters, tidal waters, Rivers and Harbors Act)
Has this PCN previously been submitted?*
O Yes
O No
Please provide the date of the previous submission.*
1/13/2021
1b. What type(s) of permit(s) do you wish to seek authorization?
Ill Nationwide Permit (NWP)
O Regional General Permit (RGP)
O Standard (IP)
lc. Has the NWP or GP number been verified by the Corps?
O Yes 0 No
Nationwide Permit (NWP) Number:
NWP Numbers (for multiple NWPS):
Id. Type(s) of approval sought from the DWR:
OO 401 Water Quality Certification - Regular
O Non-404 Jurisdictional General Permit
O Individual 401 Water Quality Certification
03 - Maintenance
le. Is this notification solely for the record because written approval is not required?
For the record only for DWR 401 Certification:
For the record only for Corps Permit:
If. Is this an after -the -fact permit application?*
OYes C No
0 401 Water Quality Certification - Express
OO Riparian Buffer Authorization
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
0 Yes
lg. Is payment into a mitigation bank or in -lieu fee program proposed for mitigation of impacts?
Yes No
1h. Is the project located in any of NC's twenty coastal counties?
0 Yes • No
1j. Is the project located in a designated trout watershed?
Yes • No
B. Applicant Information
OYes 0O No
OYes 0O No
ld. Who is applying for the permit?
O Owner O Applicant (other than owner)
le. Is there an Agent/Consultant for this project?*
OYes 0No
2. Owner Information
2a. Name(s) on recorded deed:
City of Durham
2b. Deed book and page no.:
2c. Contact Person:
Donald Greeley

2d. Address
Street Address
1600 Mist Lake Drive
Address Line 2
City
Durham
Postal / Zip Code
27704
2e. Telephone Number:
[phone]
2g. Email Address:*
[e-mail]
4. Agent/Consultant (if applicable)
4a. Name:
Keven Arrance
4b. Business Name:
Hazen and Sawyer
4c. Address
Street Address
4011 WestChase Blvd, Suite 500
Address Line 2
City
Raleigh
Postal / Zip Code
27607
4d. Telephone Number:
[phone]
4f. Email Address: *
[e-mail]
C. Project Information and Prior Project History
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
2f. Fax Number:
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
4e. Fax Number:
1. Project Information
lb. Subdivision name:
(if appropriate)
lc. Nearest municipality / town:
Durham
2. Project Identification
2a. Property Identification Number:
0857-03-03-6386, 0856-01-09-0618, 0847-03-
68-8160
2c. Project Address
Street Address
7019 Lake Michie Dam Road
Address Line 2
City
Bahama
Postal / Zip Code
27503
3. Surface Waters
3a. Name of the nearest body of water to proposed project: *
Lake Michie and Flat River
3b. Water Resources Classification of nearest receiving water: *
WS-III; NSW, CA (lake); WS-IV; NSW, CA (river)
3c. What river basin(s) is your project located in?*
2b. Property size:
72, 30, 580
State / Province / Region
NC
Country
USA
Neuse

3d. Please provide the 12-digit HUC in which the project is located.
030202010104
4. Project Description and History
4a. Describe the existing conditions on the site and the general land use in the vicinity of the project at the time of this application: *
The site consists of an active raw water intake and pump station associated with Lake Michie. The facility is one of the City of Durham's raw water sources. A dirt access road to the intake,
pump station, dam, and caretaker's residence are onsite. Within the project's limits of disturbance, many areas are maintained as part of the raw water intake facility; additionally, there are
existing utility easements, a restricted lake access, and areas maintained as part of a Durham Police training facility. The lands surrounding the project footprint consist of Lake Michie,
undeveloped forested areas, the Durham Police training facility, and the caretaker's residence. Topography landward of the project footprint is generally steep, sloping up from the lake
edge.
4b. Have Corps permits or DWR certifications been obtained for this project (including all prior phases) in the past?*
O Yes 0 No 0 Unknown
If yes, please give the DWR Certification number or the Corps Action ID (exp. SAW-0000-00000).
DWR# 20210089, v1 (20100555, v2); USAGE Action ID SAW-2021-01009
4f. List the total estimated acreage of all existing wetlands on the property:
0
4g. List the total estimated linear feet of all existing streams on the property:
5,500
4h. Explain the purpose of the proposed project:*
Lake Michie serves as one of the City of Durham's (City's) two primary water sources with a safe yield of 10.5-million gallons per day (mgd). Lake water is conveyed through an existing
pump station built in the 1920's to the City's Brown and Williams Water Treatment Plants (WTPs) for treatment and subsequent distribution. The City will continue to rely heavily on Lake
Michie as one of its raw water sources for the foreseeable future.
Previous condition assessment efforts at the Lake Michie Dam and Raw Water Pump Station (PS) identified several noteworthy deficiencies with many facility components approaching or
beyond the end of their useful service life. Therefore, the City is moving forward with a construction project to address multiple facility needs at this location to ensure sustainable and
reliable source water delivery to the WTPs. The proposed improvements to the Lake Michie Dam and Raw Water Pump Station impact all pertinent facility systems. The primary
improvement efforts planned at this facility consist of improvements to the existing raw water intake, construction of new groundwater well and conventional septic system, and numerous
repair, rehabilitation, and improvement items in and on the PS.
4i. Describe the overall project in detail, including indirect impacts and the type of equipment to be used: *
Intake improvements include installation of new galvanized steel bar screens and selective water column withdrawal capabilities. Withdrawal will be provided by new 54-inch pipe risers
and butterfly valves located at optimal lake levels along the risers to ensure withdrawal capabilities and to optimize water quality. These risers will be located in two of the existing intake
bays. A new low-level outlet will be installed in the third intake bay. The low-level outlet will have a 66-inch sluice gate and will facilitate lake draining and a 48-inch sluice gate to
accommodate emergency low-level withdrawals for water supply purposes. Sluice gates and valves will allow PS operators to control flows and withdrawals through the low-level outlet.
Maintenance dredging of accumulated sediments adjacent to the intake is needed to conduct the improvements and to facilitate continued operations of the intake. The dredging limits will
be determined by the contractor based on conditions existing at the time of construction and will be limited to the minimum dredging necessary. The contractor will be contractually
obligated to not exceed 200 feet in any direction from the intake structure with the dredging activities.
The project includes construction of a new groundwater well and a subsurface, conventional septic system to provide water and sewer service to the PS. A new 2-inch water line is
proposed from the well site, located in the front yard, and routed to the interior of the PS. A packaged pump station and 2-inch sewer line is proposed to convey wastewater from the PS to
the septic system, which is proposed to be located up the hill to the west side of the station. The packaged pump station will be installed inside the existing structure of the Lake Michie
Raw Water PS. The sewer line will be installed along the western limit of the area that is currently cleared, graded, and maintained in support of the Raw Water PS. All such infrastructure
is located on the downstream side of the reservoir.
Repair, rehabilitation, and improvement items in and on the PS will address pumping, piping, electrical systems, architectural features, structural needs, control systems, and the HVAC
system. The work will occur inside the existing PS structure on the pumps, piping, some electrical components, some architectural components, some structural repairs, control systems,
and HVAC system. Exterior to the PS, electrical improvements include a new utility transformer to be installed by the electric utility provider and a new standby generator. Architectural
upgrades to the PS exterior will include addressing cosmetic concerns as well as removing hazardous building materials, including lead -based paint and asbestos. Structural repairs will
occur inside and outside of the PS building, as well. Exterior structural repairs will address deteriorating concrete surfaces required to support the proposed intake upgrades.
Temporary installation of a prefabricated concrete column is proposed to facilitate the intake modifications following the dredging efforts. The concrete column will allow for the
establishment and maintenance of a dry work area along the face of the intake bays during the use and curing of concrete grout. Lake access, necessary to complete the dredging and
intake work, is proposed to occur to the east of the spillway from the Durham Police Gun Range property. Lake access from this location has been utilized on previous dam rehabilitation
projects. The access area is presently maintained lawn abutted by undisturbed forest to the east and the dam to the west. An alternate lake access point that may be used, if needed or
preferred, is via the marina at the Lake Michie Recreation Area on Bahama Road, located northwest of the dam. No site alterations at the recreation area are necessary to accommodate
the watercraft and equipment that may be launched from the marina. Property access for all other improvements is anticipated via Lake Michie Dam Road.
The site layout includes the designation of two construction laydown areas - one is located on the west side of Lake Michie Dam Road and south of the dam, and the other is located on
the west side of Lake Michie Dam Road approximately 4,800 feet south of the dam. The laydown areas will provide space for the construction contractors temporary office trailer and
temporary storage of materials and equipment. The northern laydown area currently consists of an underground utility easement and abutting young forest. The southern laydown area
currently consists of undeveloped forest bisected by a utility easement with aboveground and underground utilities. The laydown areas are situated in upland areas with no streams or
riparian buffer zones.
The use of both marine and land construction equipment is anticipated to complete the proposed work at the site including, but not limited to, a sectional barge; clamshell dredge; hydraulic
dredge; crane; lull; front end loader, excavator, and/or backhoe; forklift; and dump truck. Blasting is not anticipated to be necessary for the proposed activities. However, should subsurface
conditions be encountered that necessitate blasting, the decision to perform blasting will be made by the contractor with approval by the City.
Tree removals are anticipated to occur in support of the proposed project. Tree removals will be limited to the laydown areas and the septic field. No tree removals are proposed within or
abutting riparian buffer areas protected under the Neuse River Buffer Rules.
5. Jurisdictional Determinations
5a. Have the wetlands or streams been delineated on the property or proposed impact areas? *
JYes ONo
Comments:
5b. If the Corps made a jurisdictional determination, what type of determination was made? *
O Preliminary 0 Approved O Not Verified O Unknown O N/A
Corps AID Number:
0 Unknown
5c. If 5a is yes, who delineated the jurisdictional areas?

Name (if known):
Agency/Consultant Company:
Other:
6. Future Project Plans
K. Arrance, L. Diebolt
Hazen and Sawyer
6a. Is this a phased project?*
O Yes O No
Are any other NWP(s), regional general permit(s), or individual permits(s) used, or intended to be used, to authorize any part of the proposed project or related activity?
The City of Durham is designing and contracting the construction of improvements at the Little River Raw Water Pump Station and the Lake Michie Dam and Raw Water Pump Station
together under a single contract. For simplicity in the Section 404, Section 401, and buffer permitting, only the Lake Michie site is discussed in this PCN application.
D. Proposed Impacts Inventory
1. Impacts Summary
la. Where are the impacts associated with your project? (check all that apply):
❑ Wetlands O Streams -tributaries
Chi Open Waters 0 Pond Construction
4. Open Water Impacts
OO Buffers
4a. Site #
4a1. Impact Reason
4b. Impact type
4c. Name of waterbody
4d. Activity type
4e. Waterbody type
4f. Impact area
L1
Rehabilitate raw water
intake
P
Lake Michie
Dredging
Lake
0.12
4g. Total temporary open water Impacts:
0.00
4g. Total open water impacts:
0.12
4h. Comments:
4g. Total permanent open water impacts:
0.12
The impacts consist of replacement of components associated with the existing raw water intake and maintenance dredging of accumulated sediments
and debris in the lake adjacent to the intake structure. The impact area is stated as an anticipated maximum area; the actual dredging extents will be
determined by the contractor, not to exceed 200 feet in any direction from the existing intake. Temporary dewatering to accommodate the intake
modifications will occur fully within the footprint of the dredging operation.
6. Buffer Impacts (for DWR)
6a. Project is in which protect basin(s)?
Check all that apply.
O Neuse
O Catawba
O Goose Creek
O Other
O Tar -Pamlico
O Randleman
O Jordan Lake
6b. Impact Type
6c. Per or Temp
6d. Stream name
6e. Buffer mitigation required?
6f. Zone 1 impact
6g. Zone 2 impact
B1 - exempt
T
Lake Michie
No
0
418
B2 - exempt
T
Lake Michie
No
19
492
6h. Total buffer impacts:
Total Temporary impacts:
Total Permanent impacts:
Zone 1
19.00
Zone 1
0.00
Zone 1
Total combined buffer impacts: 19.00
Zone 2
910.00
Zone 2
0.00
Zone 2
910.00
6i. Comments:
B1 impact consists of excavation to bury a new sewer line in an area that is currently maintained as a part of the Raw Water Pump Station site. B2
impact consists of lake access via an existing access. No woody vegetation will be removed from the buffer. As such, the buffer impact is exempt as
existing use.

E. Impact Justification and Mitigation
1. Avoidance and Minimization
la. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts in designing the project:
Full avoidance of impacts to jurisdictional areas is only feasible with an alternative that does not fully meet the need for the project. Installation of the
new bar screens and selective water column withdrawal capabilities cannot be completed without in -water work. Dredging the accumulated sediment
and debris in front of the intake structure is necessary to allow the intake work to be completed and to facilitate reliability in the operation and capacity of
the intake in the future. The final grade to be established in the dredging area is a 1:1 slope; the slope was selected as the steepest slope feasible to be
stable while minimizing the extent of the impacted lakebed. The components of the project located in uplands have been sited in previously disturbed
areas and as far away from the edge of water as is feasible, given the site constraints, in an effort to minimize potential, unintended sediment inputs into
the lake or river.
lb. Specifically describe measures taken to avoid or minimize the proposed impacts through construction techniques:
In -water work will be performed in dry conditions, within a prefabricated concrete column. The column will be installed and maintained for the duration of
use and curing of concrete grout. Dredging will be limited to the minimum necessary to meet the purpose and need of the dredging and will not exceed
200 feet in any direction from the intake structure. The exact limits and depth of dredging will be determined by the construction contractor.
The remainder of the proposed activities will occur in upland areas landward of the protected riparian buffer. Vehicle maintenance and repairs shall be
performed away from jurisdictional areas in order to protect sensitive resources from effects resulting from spilled or leaked fluids. Erosion and sediment
control measures will be installed prior to land disturbance and will be maintained for the duration of land disturbing activities in order to protect against
unintended deposition of sediments into the lake. No fill material will be placed in jurisdictional areas.
2. Compensatory Mitigation for Impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State
2a. Does the project require Compensatory Mitigation for impacts to Waters of the U.S. or Waters of the State?
O Yes O No
2b. If this project DOES NOT require Compensatory Mitigation, explain why:
Mitigation is not required under the Clean Water Act or Neuse River Buffer Rules for the proposed impacts.
F. Stormwater Management and Diffuse Flow Plan (required by DWR)
1. Diffuse Flow Plan
1 a. Does the project include or is it adjacent to protected riparian buffers identified within one of the NC Riparian Buffer Protection Rules?
ti Yes No
What type of SCM are you providing?
oii Level Spreader
O Vegetated Conveyance (lower SHWT)
E Wetland Swale (higher SHWT)
ID Other SCM that removes minimum 30% nitrogen
O Proposed project will not create concentrated stormwater flow through the buffer
2. Stormwater Management Plan
2a. Is this a NCDOT project subject to compliance with NCDOT's Individual NPDES permit NCS000250? *
OYes 0No
2b. Does this project meet the requirements for low density projects as defined in 15A NCAC 02H .1003(2)?
OYes 0No
Comments:
G. Supplementary Information
lJ
1. Environmental Documentation
la. Does the project involve an expenditure of public (federal/state/local) funds or the use of public (federal/state) land?*
O Yes O No
lb. If you answered "yes" to the above, does the project require preparation of an environmental document pursuant to the requirements of the National or State (North Carolina)
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA/SEPA)?*
O Yes O No
Comments:*
The project is below the minimum criteria that trigger the preparation of a SEPA document. The project does not involve federal funds, federal lands, or
federal agency involvement other than authorization under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
2. Violations (DWR Requirement)

2a. Is the site in violation of DWR Water Quality Certification Rules (15A NCAC 2H .0500), Isolated Wetland Rules (15A NCAC 2H .1300), or DWR Surface Water or Wetland Standards or
Riparian Buffer Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0200)?*
O Yes rJ No
3. Cumulative Impacts (DWR Requirement)
3a. Will this project result in additional development, which could impact nearby downstream water quality?*
O Yes O No
3b. If you answered "no," provide a short narrative description.
The project will not increase the existing capacity of the raw water intake pump station. No new areas will be served by Durham post -construction.
Therefore, development that is not currently supported by the existing drinking water capacity of Durham will not be supported upon completion of the
proposed project.
4. Sewage Disposal (DWR Requirement)
4a. Is sewage disposal required by DWR for this project?*
Yes •; No N/A
5. Endangered Species and Designated Critical Habitat (Corps Requirement)
5a. Will this project occur in or near an area with federally protected species or habitat?*
• Yes O No
5b. Have you checked with the USFWS concerning Endangered Species Act impacts?*
Yes O No
5d. Is another Federal agency involved?*
Yes
5e. Is this a DOT project located within Division's 1-8?
0 Yes ® No
O No O Unknown
5f. Will you cut any trees in order to conduct the work in waters of the U.S.?
0 Yes ® No
5g. Does this project involve bridge maintenance or removal?
OYes 0No
5h. Does this project involve the construction/installation of a wind turbine(s)?*
OYes ®No
5i. Does this project involve (1) blasting, and/or (2) other percussive activities that will be conducted by machines, such as jackhammers, mechanized pile drivers, etc.?
0 Yes ® No
5j. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact Endangered Species or Designated Critical Habitat?
The USFWS IPaC tool was accessed most recently in June 2022. Two terrestrial plants are listed - Michaux's sumac and smooth coneflower. Hazen
biologists performed an assessment of the available habitat for the listed plants within the impact areas. Habitat was found to not be present with
suitable disturbance regime to support Michaux's sumac or smooth coneflower. One candidate species is noted on the IPaC report, Monarch butterfly.
Milkweeds have been observed adjacent to but not within the southern laydown area.
Three aquatic species are listed - Neuse River waterdog, Carolina madtom, and Atlantic pigtoe. The in -water work includes dredging of accumulated
sediments and debris within the lake. The aquatic species inhabit waterbodies with flow (e.g., streams, creeks, rivers). No impact to federally listed or
candidate species will result from the project.
6. Essential Fish Habitat (Corps Requirement)
6a. Will this project occur in or near an area designated as an Essential Fish Habitat?*
Yes ® No
6b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact an Essential Fish Habitat?*
NOAA EFH mapper was consulted.
7. Historic or Prehistoric Cultural Resources (Corps Requirement)
7a. Will this project occur in or near an area that the state, federal or tribal governments have designated as having historic or cultural preservation status?*
® Yes O No
7b. What data sources did you use to determine whether your site would impact historic or archeological resources?*
The northern laydown area is located within the Bennehan-Cameron Historic District, which was determined eligible for listing in 1978. The district has
not been listed in the National Register. At present, no structures are present within, surrounding, or visible from the northern laydown area. Additionally,
the laydown area is not visible from any structure located within the eligible district.
8. Flood Zone Designation (Corps Requirement)
8a. Will this project occur in a FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain?*
G Yes O No

8b. If yes, explain how project meets FEMA requirements:
The majority of the project is located upgradient of the 100-year flood zone. The portion of the project that will occur within the 100-year flood zone
consists of the in -water work to be done on the intake structure and associated dredging. No alteration of the land within the flood zone is proposed as
part of the project. No new structures or fill material are proposed to be placed, installed, or constructed in the flood zone.
8c. What source(s) did you use to make the floodplain determination?*
Map panels 3720085700K, 3720084700K, and 3720085600K, all effective 10/19/2019.
Miscellaneous
Please use the space below to attach all required documentation or any additional information you feel is helpful for application review. Documents should be combined into one file when
possible, with a Cover Letter, Table of Contents, and a Cover Sheet for each Section preferred.
Click the upload button or drag and drop files here to attach document
IPaC-Lake Michie.pdf 604.72KB
New SHPO map Lake Michie.pdf 452.39KB
Lake Michie PS - figures_2022.pdf 1.12MB
404_401_Agent Authorization DG signed.pdf 161.47KB
File must be PDF or KMZ
Comments
Design plans were provided with the original submittal. Please reach out to me if a second submittal of design plans is needed.
Signature
By checking the box and signing below, I certify that:
• The project proponent hereby certifies that all information contained herein is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief'; and
• The project proponent hereby requests that the certifying authority review and take action on this CWA 401 certification request within the applicable reasonable period of time.
• I have given true, accurate, and complete information on this form;
I agree that submission of this PCN form is a "transaction" subject to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I agree to conduct this transaction by electronic means pursuant to Chapter 66, Article 40 of the NC General Statutes (the "Uniform Electronic Transactions Act");
I understand that an electronic signature has the same legal effect and can be enforced in the same way as a written signature; AND
I intend to electronically sign and submit the PCN form.
Full Name:
Keven Arrance
Signature
C/ •t4QA'c2o
Date
7/21/2022

AGENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER
PROJECT LOCATION: The project is located at the northern terminus of Lake Michie Dam Road in
Durham. The project site is situated south and west of the Lake Michie dam and includes a portion of
the darn. The project site provides a work area for repairs and upgrades to the raw water intake
pump station, and various related site improvements.
STREET ADDRESS: 7019 Lake Michie Dam Road, Bahama, NC 27503
Please print:
Applicant: City of Durham, Water Management
Applicant Contact Person: Donald Greeley, PE, PLS
The undersigned applicant of the proposed project do hereby authorize
Keven Arrance of Hazen and Sawyer
(Consultant/Agent) (Name of Consulting Firm)
to act on my behalf and take all actions necessary for the processing, issuance and acceptance of
the attached permit or certification and any and all standard and special conditions attached.
Applicant's Mailing Address (if different than property above):
101 City Hall Plaza, Durham, NC 27701
Telephone: [phone]
We hereby certify the above information submitted in this application is true and accurate to the
best of our knowledge.
SisS
(Applicant) (Date)

NCHPO HPOWEB
Lul Mi' hie
TO
H2242 Marcus Tilly E
DH2498 Parrish School ro
Fragment House 20'jtj m
D H24i32 Mount Calvary a 4o
.Missionary Baptist Church Fri i
X
It'
DH2372 A. K. UmsteadDH2372 A. K. Umstead
House 1988 A House 1996
a o
JOB,t-Jh
13 1
0-
1cP
oc.1',a
•- DH22D3 CassumTille}` f 0.'
Farm and Store 1 1 ko
DH1818 Phillip Southerland fi- 1 GRANVILLE
'� House 19SS
•
,1}
w,.
`q t.P'H21:70 AmedlTilleyDH2 170 Amed Tilley
DH 438 Henry Lee Um stead Farm 1984} Farm 1991
oge
House fro
owei
DH2304 Truss Bridge 04"
28 1979 045
A
f"w
,4 r
# #P
p h IDH--- Great Barn n
DH0003 Hoiton GroveiID
Cn7plx 1 +73
0
it
1/29/2021, 1:34:06 PM 1:36,112
0 0.25 0.5 1 mi
...: Local districts&boundaries . Local Landmark,Gone Surveyed Only individual resources&centerpoints I I I 1 1 1 1
Local individual resources&centerpoints * Local HD Center Point Surveyed Only 0 0.4 0.8 1.6 km
Local Landmark Surveyed in NRHD State of North Carolina DOT, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, NGA,
North Carolina State Historic Preservation Office
State of North Carolina DOT,Esri,HERE,Garmin,INCREMENT P,NGA,USGS

2,000 1,000 0
2,000 Feet
1 inch = 2,000 feet
W+E
DURHAM
1 8 6 9
CITY OF MEDICINE
Hazen
7
Lake Access and
Laydown Area I
Copyright:© 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed
USGS Topographic Map
Lake Michie Dam and
Raw Water Pump Station Improvements
Falls Lake Watershed
City of Durham, North Carolina

200
Permanent Impact toLake K4iohie
O.12acre maintenance dredging
Rehabilitation of Raw Water Intake
Limits of Disturbance
Lake impactArea
100
0
Existing Raw Water Intake Pump Station
Waters ofthe United States Impacts Map
Lake K4iohia Dam and
Raw Water Pump Station Improvements
Falls Lake Watershed
City ofDurham, North Carolina

Temporary Impact to 418 SF
Existing Use - Excavation
200
Riparian Buffer Limits
Limits of Disturbance
100
0
200 Feet
1 inch = 200 feet
W- E
Temporary Impact to
19 SF of Zone 1 and
492 SF of Zone 2
Existing Use - Lake Access
Existing Raw Water Intake Pump Station
Hazen
Riparian Buffer Impacts Map
Lake Michie Dam and
Raw Water Pump Station Improvements
Falls Lake Watershed
City of Durham, North Carolina

IPaC
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat (collectively
referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS) jurisdiction that are known or
expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list may also include trust resources that
occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be directly or indirectly affected by activities in the
project area. However, determining the likelihood and extent of effects a project may have on trust resources
typically requires gathering additional site -specific (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project -specific (e.g.,
magnitude and timing of proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS office(s)
with jurisdiction in the defined project area. Please read the introduction to each section that follows
(Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for additional information
applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.1111
Location
Durham County, North Carolina
Local office
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
t. [phone]
la [phone]
MAILING ADDRESS
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, NC 27636-3726
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
551 Pylon Drive, Suite F
Raleigh, NC 27606-1487
-qb-N
Go�

Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of project level
impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species. Additional
areas of influence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of the species range if
the species could be indirectly affected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a dam upstream of a fish
population even if that fish does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly impact the species by reducing or
eliminating water flow downstream). Because species can move, and site conditions can change, the species
on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near the project area. To fully determine any potential effects
to species, additional site -specific and project -specific information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary information
whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area of such proposed
action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any Federal agency. A letter from
the local office and a species list which fulfills this requirement can only be obtained by requesting an official
species list from either the Regulatory Review section in IPaC (see directions below) or from the local field
office directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website and request
an official species list by doing the following: poii
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the fisheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA Fisheries=).
Species and criticaabitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this list. Please
contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows species
that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more information. IPaC only
shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an office of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially affected by activities in this location:
Amphibians
NAME
STATUS

Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. Your location overlaps the
critical habitat.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772
Fishes
Threatened
NAME STATUS
Carolina Madtom Noturus furiosus
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical
habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/528
Clams
NAME
Endangered
STATUS
Atlantic Pigtoe Fusconaia masoni Threatened
Wherever found
There is final critical habitat for this species. The location of the critical
0\4S"
habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5164
Insects
NAME STATUS
Monarch Butterfly Danaus plexi
Wherever found
No critical habitat has -lee esig'r t-. for this species.
https://ecos.fw gov/ecp/species/9743
Flo plants
Mi aux's Sumac Rhus michauxii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5217
Smooth Coneflower Echinacea laevigata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3473
Critical habitats
Candidate
STATUS
Endangered
Endangered
Potential effects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered species
themselves.

This location overlaps the critical habitat for the following species:
NAME TYPE
Neuse River Waterdog Necturus lewisi Final
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6772#crithab
Migratory birds
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act1 and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
z
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory birds,
eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing appropriate 1
conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links: #c 1)b%°C\°\
• Birds of Conservation Concern https://www.fws.gov/program/mi ary-birds/species
• Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds https://www.fws.gov/library/collections/avoiding-
and-minimizing-incidental-take-migratory-birds
IltelaiVE00
• Nationwide conservation measures for birds0.441
https://www.fws.gov/sites/default/files/doy„n nts/n ti nwide-standard-conservation-measures.pdf
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the
Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn more about
the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ below. This is not a list of
every bird you may find in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on this list will be found in your project
area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general public have sighted birds in and around your
project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip: enter your location, desired date range and a species on
your list). For projects that occur off the Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative
occurrence and abundance of bird species on your list are available. Links to additional information about
Atlantic Coast birds, and other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly
interpret and use your migratory bird report, can be found
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to reduce
impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at the top of your
list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A BREEDING
SEASON IS INDICATED FOR A BIRD ON
YOUR LIST, THE BIRD MAY BREED IN
YOUR PROJECT AREA SOMETIME
WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED,
WHICH IS AVERY LIBERAL ESTIMATE
OF THE DATES INSIDE WHICH THE
BIRD BREEDS ACROSS ITS ENTIRE
RANGE. "BREEDS ELSEWHERE"
INDICATES THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT

LIKELY BREED IN YOUR PROJECT
AREA.)
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but warrants
attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential susceptibilities in offshore
areas from certain types of development or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Black -billed Cuckoo Coccyzus erythropthalmus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9399
Eastern Whip -poor -will Antrostomus vociferus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Kentucky Warbler Oporornis formosus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Prairie Warbler Dendroica discolor
Breeds Sep 1 to Jul 31
Breeds May 15 to Oct 10
Breeds May 1 to Aug 20 1\114
Breeds Ate)
0146Vds May 1 to Jul 31
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in th
continental USA and Alaska. it,
Prothonotary Warbler Protonotaria citrea
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern BCC) %rougjout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Red-headed Woodpecke▪ r ▪ Melanpees erythrocephalus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Rusty Blackbird Euphagus carolinus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Wood Thrush Hylocichla mustelina
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in the
continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
Breeds May 10 to Sep 10
Breeds elsewhere
Breeds May 10 to Aug 31
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be present in
your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project activities to avoid or
minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ "Proper Interpretation and
Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ( )

Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your project
overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.) A taller bar
indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey effort (see below) can be used to establish a
level of confidence in the presence score. One can have higher confidence in the presence score if the
corresponding survey effort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the week where
the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that week. For example, if in
week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was found in 5 of them, the probability of
presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence is
calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence across all
weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted Towhee is 0.05, and
that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any week of the year. The relative
probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is 0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical conversion so
that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bare
Breeding Season ( )
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time -frame inside which the bird breeds across its entire
range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.
Survey Effort (I)
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys performed
for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of surveys is expressed as a
range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey effort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
No Data ( )
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant information. The
exception to this is areas off the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all years of available data,
since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
SPECIES
Bald Eagle
Non -BCC Vulnerable
(This is not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in this
area, but warrants
attention because of
the Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
offshore areas from
certain types of
development or
probability of presence breeding season I survey effort — no data
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
III! :PI
1111
1111 lL-1 II11 ii1' ii++ 11011 1111
activities.)

Black -billed Cuckoo
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
Eastern Whip -poor -
will
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
Kentucky Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
Prairie Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
Prothonotary
Warbler
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +Ili ++++ 01++ ++++ ++++
++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ 1111 1111 ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
ar-
Red-headed
Woodpecker
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
I1 +AI 1111 1111
III+ ++++ ++++ ++++ 104
0111 1111 1111 +++OVA
, iciv
-c\O
II++ ++++ ++++
+T 11M �� III 1111 1111 +I111+++ ++++
++++
1101 1101 1111 1111 1111 Iill 1!1l II IA 1111 1111 1111 1111
Rusty Blackbird +M 1 1 1 1 ++ 1111 MI ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ ++++ +++1 1111 1111
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA)

Wood Thrush
BCC Rangewide
++++ ++++ ++++ +i11 1111 1111 1111 I+++ ++++ I+++ ++++ ++++
(CON) (This is a Bird
of Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its range
in the continental
USA and Alaska.)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at any location
year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to occur in the project area.
When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and avoiding their destruction is a very
helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to occur and be breeding in your project area, view the
Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are
conducting and the type of infrastructure or bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my specified location?
n1.412\111141\1111
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species that may
warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the AvianiCnovle work (AKN). The
AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and 4ic4eried and filtered to return
a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project fntersects,d that have been identified as
ciliawarranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that area, eagl (Eale Act requirements may apply), or a
species that has a particular vulnerability to offshore activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subs of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not
representative of all birds that may occur in your project ea.
To get a Iit of all birds potentially present in your project area,
please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
� C1
O
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially occurring in my
specified location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the Avian Knowledge
Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets .
Probability of presen data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To learn more
aboutlkow the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the Probability of Presence
Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or year-round),
you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide or (if you are unsuccessful
in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds guide. If a bird on your migratory bird
species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur in your project area, there may be nests present at
some point within the timeframe specified. If "Breeds elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your
project area.
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range anywhere
within the USA (including Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA;
and

such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
3. "Non -BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of the Eagle
Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non -eagles) potential susceptibilities in offshore areas from certain types of
development or activities (e.g. offshore energy development or longline fishing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, efforts should be made, in particular, to avoid and
minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For more information on
conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird impacts and requirements for eagles,
please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially affected by offshore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of bird species
within your project area off the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal also offers data and
information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review. Alternately, you may download
the bird model results files underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS Integrative Statistical Modeling and
Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year, including.‘"04\6
migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on marine
data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam Loring. 3 �
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the Eagle Act should
Age
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority concern. To learn
more about how your list is generated, and see options fur identifying what other birds may be in your project area, please see
the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migr . r birds potentially occurring in my specified location". Please be aware
this report provides the "probability of presence" t bird- ithin the 10 km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact
project footprint. On the graphs provided, phase al • •k carefully at the survey effort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and
for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a red horizontal bar). A high survey effort is the key component. If the survey effort
is high, then the probability of presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey effort bar or no
data bar means a lack of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is
simply a startin�t for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be
there, and i m ht be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to confirm
prese ce, :nd h• ps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or minimize potential impacts
fr y r rojer activities, should presence be confirmed. To learn more about conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me
ab ervation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your
mig tory bird trust resources page.
Coastal Barrier Resources System
Projects within the John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) may be subject to the restrictions
on federal expenditures and financial assistance and the consultation requirements of the Coastal Barrier
Resources Act (CBRA) (16 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). For more information, please contact the local Ecological
Services Field Office or visit the CBRA Consultations website. The CBRA website provides tools such as a flow
chart to help determine whether consultation is required and a template to facilitate the consultation process.
THERE ARE NO KNOWN COASTAL BARRIERS AT THIS LOCATION.
Data limitations

The CBRS boundaries used in IPaC are representations of the controlling boundaries, which are depicted on the official CBRS
maps. The boundaries depicted in this layer are not to be considered authoritative for in/out determinations close to a CBRS
boundary (i.e., within the "CBRS Buffer Zone" that appears as a hatched area on either side of the boundary). For projects that
are very close to a CBRS boundary but do not clearly intersect a unit, you may contact the Service for an official determination
by following the instructions here: https://www.fws.gov/service/coastal-barrier-resources-system-property-documentation
Data exclusions
CBRS units extend seaward out to either the 20- or 30-foot bathymetric contour (depending on the location of the unit). The
true seaward extent of the units is not shown in the CBRS data, therefore projects in the offshore areas of units (e.g., dredging,
breakwaters, offshore wind energy or oil and gas projects) may be subject to CBRA even if they do not intersect the CBRS data.
For additional information, please contact [e-mail].
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a 'Compatibility
Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to discuss any questions or
11111/4)
concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.
C PI\4S
Fish hatcheries
4fth_1(11.11
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts two NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update our NWI
data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual extent of wetlands on
site.
This location overlaps the following wetlands:
FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
Palustrine
LAKE
Lacustrine

RIVERI N E
Riverine
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level information on the
location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high altitude imagery. Wetlands are
identified based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error is inherent in the use of imagery; thus,
detailed on -the -ground inspection of any particular site may result in revision of the wetland boundaries or classification
established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts, the amount
and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth verification work conducted. Metadata should be consulted
to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or field work. There may be occasional
differences in polygon boundaries or classifications between the information depicted on the map and the actual conditions on
ac\L)
site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitatic is of aerial imagery as the
primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses orlubmerged Nivatic vegetation that are
found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters. Some deepwater reef communities (coral
or tuberficid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory. These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected
by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agenc ith j di n over wetlands may define and describe wetlands in a different
manner than that used in this invento Th is no a empt, in either the design or products of this inventory, to define the
limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any FederaC ate, or local government or to establish the geographical scope of the
regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in activities involving modifications within or
adjacent to wetland eas should seek the advice of appropriate federal, state, or local agencies concerning specified agency
regulatory progr and proprietary jurisdictions that may affect such activities.
\40